NFL owners may see increased revenues from an expanded regular season, but is it fair for the players?
bigdaddyfat: Who cares if it's good for the players or not? Multi million dollar contracts are good for them, this is good for us. Yea, us. We finally wi...
loux24: All depends on customer demand. The NFL is a discretionary entertainment product, nothing more. ...
nonot: Assuming they mean that they will go from 4 preseason games to 2, they will have less of an opportunity to evaluate talent, and the first 1 ...
Make a Comment | All Comments (9)
Of course it is fair to they players so long as they are fairly compensated for the extra 2 games. Plus now they all have the chance to become a new record holders with the extra playing time.
March 25, 2009 3:20 PM | Report Offensive Comments
It's not fair to the player because the extra two games would lead to an onslaught of injuries--especially hamstring, ankle and knee injuries. Two preseason games isnotenough time to adjust to live game speed. What do they think this is the USFL or something? The amount of players' downtime resulting from injuries would pretty much cancel out the extra two games. Who know's how many season ending injuries would occur. Players have to be eased into live-game speed after several months off.
March 25, 2009 4:15 PM | Report Offensive Comments
It will be fair to the players, more opportunity in bigger rosters and more money. But when will this end? 12, 14, 16, 18....they'll be playing the Super Bowl in March for crying out loud. Losers are the fans, higher season ticket prices, and higher 'Sunday Ticket' price with DirecTV. C'mon owners and Commish, just how much money is enough?
March 26, 2009 12:19 PM | Report Offensive Comments
17 or 18 games are good but the NFL needs to cut out some of the preseason games if they end up doing so.
March 26, 2009 12:47 PM | Report Offensive Comments
It will happen and I support the move. Baseball expanded, basketball expanded (it's nearly year-round now), so why, exactly, is the NFL the shortest season of the three?
A far more physical game to be sure but knee injuries, rotator cuff problems and high ankle sprains are part and parcel of each sport. I for one can't stand it when endless repeats of gruesome injuries are played but two more games that mean something won't reduce the number injuries that occur during pre-season.
Reduce pre-season by two, increase regular season by two but still allow until Labor Day for the teams to make final cuts. That way they will have two weeks to really find the team mix they want AND have the results count towards the play-offs as well.
March 26, 2009 12:57 PM | Report Offensive Comments
lets not only expand the regular season, but expand the post season by making every team eligible for the playoffs through a seeding process, that way a team like the lions have something to look forward to
March 27, 2009 9:57 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Who cares if it's good for the players or not? Multi million dollar contracts are good for them, this is good for us. Yea, us. We finally win one!
April 1, 2009 5:41 PM | Report Offensive Comments
All depends on customer demand. The NFL is a discretionary entertainment product, nothing more.
April 6, 2009 4:31 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Assuming they mean that they will go from 4 preseason games to 2, they will have less of an opportunity to evaluate talent, and the first 1 or 2 regular season games will have poorer play, especially if they don't open camp earlier.
April 7, 2009 6:52 AM | Report Offensive Comments